and also lets us keep a closer watch on government. this by select -- bicyclist went into a cop but then the camera vv v. -- reveal the truth. these people could show a chord spend your money in repulsive ways and many watched the video and before "the new york times" ran a single story about the scandal congress moved to stop giving acorn your money. >> i have co-sponsored the bill to stop funding the reprehensible enterprise. john: the private digital currency to buy what government does not want you to. i do not suggest you buy illegal things but choice is good. it is freedom 2.0. it gives more options and makes a harder for government to control. that is a good thing.

that is our show. thanks for watching. on to f an friends.com. ching. on to f an see you tomorrow. >> the pigs at the trough because the pork is alive and well in d.c. the year is only one week old and lawmakers already handing out tens of billions of dollars, for green energy, electric motorcycles, nascar, hollywood, even rum makers in the caribbean. proponents say this is great news for jobs, but with nearly 16 1/2 trillion dollars in debt someone here says if don't start trimming the fat now, we're only killing more jobs later. so, who is right? hi, everyone, i'm brenda buttner, this is bulls and bears. let's get right to it, the bulls and bears this week, gary b smith, tobin smith. jonas m ferris and gary and caroline. welcome to everybody. gary k, the year is one week

old and congress passing billions of new pork and you say bad sign for jobs in the newyear. why is that? >> could have,look, it never ends. 430 million dollars for hollywood producers so they do movies in the u.s. versus other places? that's crazy. look, when you continue to raise spending it ends up being a tax on the economy, it keeps the headwinds on the economy, still at 7.8%, if you add in the people that came out of the work force we're more like at 11. it does nothing for nobody because government is inefficie inefficient, there is no profit motive and the inefficiencies because of that does notng for the economy going forward. >> brenda: jonas, doesn't it do something? might create some jobs create those electric motor scooters you love so much? >> and it's not just hollywood. you can make the case in the long run, running up the deficit can cause a fiscal

collapse and crisis that could lead to major recession, but in the short run, jobs 2013, giving the tax credit to make movies in america. if they make the movie in canada wouldn't that create less jobs in the u.s. than making the movie or commercial here. yeah, it's increasing the federal deficit it's same with building nascar race tracks, that you wouldn't have built without credits from the government. it's not a great policy long run, but it will make jobs in the short run. >> you're the only guy who likes electric motor scooters and nascar. >> it's time for an opportunity to take my scooter out on the track. >> brenda: all right. gary b, i have a feeling you don't agree. >> i don't, brenda. look, i do agree with one point jonas made, no one can disagree that stimulus spending creates jobs. we're all in agreement about that. the real question, is that dollar better spent by the government or is it spent-- betterpent by the private sector? look, this has been studied

and t multiplier, essentially, what does a dollar create in the gdp? the multiplier for government spending, stimulus spending is .64, that means every dollar you and i, brenda, give to the government and for our taxes, only raises gdp 64 cents. it says right there, no matter if you think it's great to have wind farms or hollywood producers getting breaks, the money is spent inefficiently, it's much better spent as gary k points out, in the private sector, that's why we could spend all thmoney we want on stimulus, it's not going to create as many jobs as if you and i had spent it ourselves. >> caroline, that's called basically crowding out, it's an economic term. the bottom line is if the government spends the money there won't be as much in the private sector, it's crowding is out. do you see this as a problem for the the labor market? >> well, no, i think the only way and history has proven the only way in which we stimulate an economy when it's in

recession, such as the one we're i is through government spending and would i challenge the stats on the multiplier effect that have to do a lot with money going to the service sector, where it has almost no effect, which is dragging that down. but most government spending, especially the recent stimulus, had an incredible multiplier effect. in fact, sandy is saying we're talking about millions jobs saved or created and other estimates range from 1 to 4 million cbo estimates. so i'm glad we agree that stimulus spending does stimulate the economy. >> i'm not in agreement with that, i'm sorry, there's no agreement on that. the bottom line, when you -- when government spends there's no profits, they're not making any money out of it, it comes out taxpayer dollar and we are he doing deficit spending here and guess what, that has to be paid back eventually. >> brenda: right, gary k. but the stock market isn't agreeing with you, wall street isn't agreeing with you, had an incredible week. i think the best week for stocks since december of 2011.

>> right, but remember, that was, you know, that was relief rally off in the fiscal cliff. if you're going back to the big story here, you ow, gary b, in this particular round of pork, which is a gigantic round about 65 billion dollars, you realize that corporations in the united states, all the taxes they paid in 2012 was about 150 billion dollars. so, on a big scale here, what we're seeing is, that we're giving almost half of what they paid in taxes, that to big corporations in pork. now, ga, these are pork deals, these are not the government putting money, this is the government giving a corporation a benefit for spending money,so, if your argument is right, gary b, this should be good. the bigger issue is that we're in an age now where we just talk the talk about how we were going to, you know, fess up and do the right thing. and the minute we got into 2013, we did exactly the same

thing that got us into this mess and i feel like we're having deja vu 2010 and talking about the stimulus again, come on. >> brenda: maybe they're talking the talk, but the money walks, because wall street as i said had an incredible week. why do you think that stocks went up if we've seen all of this feeding at the trough? >> free money. it's as simple as that. you have all this money going into the system in the near term. not just in this government spending, but being, you've got printed being around the world between the central banks, trillions being printed and when you have a fixed asset like the markets and all of this money chasing fixed assets, the asset price goes up. whether or not that goes in the long-term, i'm not sure because eventually it's going to be earnings and a lot of other things that matter. >> brenda: so, gary b, if stocks keep going up on this isn't that, isn't that good for the economy, good for the labor market? >> well, and brenda, i think there's a deficit disconnect and there has been between what the market is doing. >> bingo. >> and what the employment

picture looks like. look, you havehe same unemployment number as you did with all the stimulus spending when president obama took office. so, you know, to caroline's point, my gosh, stimulus spending is wonderful, helpful, it's so great. i don't see -- i'm scratching my head to see that the unemployment number whether you looked the at the u-6 number, the people that have given up looking for jobs or look at the raw unemployment number has done nothing since he took office in january of '09, that stimulus spending helps somehow. in fact, i don't see how you can make the argument the government picking industries to prosper like the whole wind farm thing, as opposed to oil and coal, is a good effective use of money. >> brenda: okay, caroline? >> because oil and coal, why do you think these oil and coal industries are so successful? they got funds upfront from the government. we've actually developed every major energy source and now moving to green energy and you're saying we shouldn't invest in it. >> the government has

deloped every major energy source? my gosh, and-- >> hold on, guys, go ahead. >> and oil-- >> right, the only reason that these major entities, alteative energies get developed and they're alternative at the te they're produced, whether we're talking timber, coal, oil or nuclear is because of massive government instment. this is nothing new. >> caroline. >> we use today invest 1% of our federal budget on alternative energy 100ears ago and now only investing 1/10 of 1% and grudgingly, even though green energy spending has created a million jobs in the last four years. so, yes, it does create jobs and-- >> caroline. >> to compare what's happened are you saying that unemployment hasn't gone down? it certainly has. >> brenda: go ahead. toby, one man's loophole is another man's tax incentive? >> well, i mean, here is a news flash, caroline, god bless you, the actual reason that prices have gone up for these resources has been actual demand, actually the market demanded, the lowest

most cost efficient energy source, that's fossil fuels. and green jobs were created, listen, i go right to the lobby, right to the green lobby, whatever jobs are created were created at a cost of about $600,000er quote, unquote, job. those jobs only-- >> okay. >> they were getting these amazing subsidies, so-- >> all right, guys, i'm sorry, our viewers hate it when everybody talks over each other. so i've got to stop you. that's got to be the last word. thanks, guys. >> sorry. >> brenda: think it's just taxes on the rich going up from na fcal cliff deal? think again. cavuto's gang crunching the number. is everyone about to get crunched? that's the bottom of the hour. and here next, even though these guys aren't getting the job done, they're gettinglsewhe

budget. i'm jamie colby, back to bulls and bears. keep it here on the fox news channel. >> brenda: just days after president obama lifted the federal worker pay freeze,

someawmakers trying to refreeze their own salaries, saying they don't deserve the extra money, but caroline, you say they not only deserve it, they're underpaid, huh? >> i think they're underpaid, brenda, when you look the at the average amount that a ceo in a publicly traded country. 9.8 million and they make in the house. 5, 195, why is it the highest elected officials in our nation are making1/50th, approximately 1/50th of the corporate titans. i think this we paid them more they would be less beholden to special interests. >> brenda: i don't know where to start. they work hard and don't take that many vacations and get done what they have to do, don't they? >> well, first of all, the ceo's of major corporations actually add value to the economy. i don't think you could make that claim, but i think it's the wrong argunt.

we have en arguing for years about this pay freeze. what i don't understand is why is there not a merit system ere? why is there across the board? i'm sure some lawmakers work their tuckus off and they do deserve a massive raise and i'm sure others goofed off and went to play golf and you know, got their hair cut at the barbershop. so we need to get rid this have whole across the board raise for eveeryone and go to some merit-based system like the real world does. >> brenda: theeal world. jonas, would that really work in government? >> that's exactly where the wheels off the train. it sounds nuts, tens of thousands, hundreds of workers who have an automatic pay increase, kind of like russia, it's just bizarre. what wouldhe alternative be, es, a merit-based system. who is going to be the manager decides who ishe good worker and bad worker. >> the manager of those employees, ke a corporation does. >> right, but corporations have those pay packages 4, 5, 7, 2 million dollars, 3 million dollars, all leveled at mba's going to work in the

government and decide to gets a raise like a real corporation? that's fantasy land. no one is eve going to work at the federal level. 2, 3, 4 million. it's not going to happen you have to index inflation automatic pay increase. how would it work, i wouldn't go work there and manage people for a hundred grand. it's nuts. >> how do you think it works in any corporation? you have, because you hav the ceo's job-- >> and that's how it works. >> brenda: there you go again, you guys. now-- >> you've got to manage people and then you go to a company where you can make a lot of money. >> brenda: i know we're excited about this. >> ladies and gentlemen, back to the-- >> go ahead, gary k. >> back to the point. these people don't deserve another nickel at this point in time. they are supposed to be the guardians of our treasure and the money we make and give to them and the bottom line is they have all put us into a 16 trillion dollar hole. the next six years of taxpayer

dollars already been spent. that's an unmitigated failure and to think that they should get any more of the tax dollars from us for putting us in this position? i don't think so. >> brenda: all right. toby, where do you fall on this? >> well, i'm intrigued by the concept if we paid our lawmakers more we would get better lawmakers. >> oh, yeah. >> and by the concept that the idea that you know, the lawmaker, many times, is paid in a lot of other ways. one thing he or she ds quite well, which is to raise money and if they were to maybe raise part of their salaries by raising money, i'd be for that. but the idea somehow we're in a position that lawmakers have earned a higher salary based on the output they've performed is ludicrous. >> brenda: okay, caroline? >> well, i would say that our congress has been the least productive in the last 50 years, so i can understand that a lot of people might be upset about the idea, but i do think we would get better lawmakers if we paid them more and also, they have to

maintain two housolds, so when i worked in congress there were a lot of members who slept on theheir couch and i'm sure that still happens today. i've never met a lawmaker who doesn't work really, really hard. i think the problem is heightened partisanship. maybe bonuses based on how well they play with others and compromise across the partisan aisle. >> and how about pay-- how about higher pay based on what they take care of the deficits and get them down. how about higher pay for performance. that's the way the real country works, not in washington d.c. >> brenda: all right. you know, gary b, you said-- >> more manager-- >> hold on, you said who are the managers? you know the truth is we're the managers and we keep sending them back, but-- >> no kidding. >> no, no, no, exactly, brenda, in fact, that woulde a good idea to have the public vote on whether their congressman or senator actually gets a raise. i was talking more for the federal than the state department stuff like that. >>renda: no, i grant you that. all right. thankso much. that's the last word. coming up, don't get a flu shot?

then get ready to kiss your job goodbye. job goodbye. it's a plan to k

♪ music body language-- without saying a word, it can tell you so much.

like someone is having a stroke... know the sudden signs. learn f.a.s.t. f- face drooping a-arm weakness s- speech difficulty t- time, time to call 911 immediately. the sooner they get to the hospital, the sooner they'll get eatment, and that can make a remarkable difference in their recovery. learn the body language, the sudden signs, and spot a stroke f.a.s.t. >> a severe flu outbreak hitting early and hitting hard. now, another hospital is firing workers for not getting flu shots. and some here say that's what all employers should do, jonas. >> i think that an employer in a private sector should be allowed to fire somebody for something that isn't discriminatory. you should have the right to do that.

think about the implications here. i n't want my starbucks served by somebody who has the flu who could have prevented that. why should i catch that as a customer and why would the boss want to pass that on to customers so if neve a rule, you don't have to work there, you can leave and go someplace where you're allowed to have the flu and this is something the employer should be allowed to do even though it sounds like they're infringing on your rights. no different than having to wear a uniform or fired for being overweight or-- >> i don't want anybody telling me i've got to get a flu shot or can't go to burger king or whatever. i can do my job. >> i'm with you on that, brenda. i can'imagine giving the employers the power to do is. many employers are doing this, firing people for not getting flu shots. they only have marginal benefit because it's often hard to predict which strains are going to be the most deadly essentially or spread the quickest across the nation.

so those who get the flu shot. 2% get the flu, versus 3% who do not get it. giving the employers the power is like telling employers telling employees they can't smoke or eat fatty food, it's an invasion of our privacy. >> brenda: and companies can pretty much do what they nt, right? >> exactly, look, i agree he with caroline, i think that flu shots are hit or miss, but jonas has the more valid point. employers, unless they're infridging on their rights somehow should be allowed to do whatever they want to increases the bottom line. when i worke at ibm i had to wear a white shirt every day. it was stupid, i didn't like white shirts, i looked better in blue, but they thought would help sell more computers and i wore white shirts. i couldn't drink on the job maybe i want add beer at four o'clock, but i couldn't. employers do all kinds of crazy things, but you know what? that's their write. >> brenda: we don't impose that on bulls and bears. toby, would you make your employees get a flu shot? >> i would first mak them all get blue shirts, because i as

well look good in blue and absolutely, i mandate that employees are going to work around other people, if they work at home, don't g a flu shot. if you're going to be in an office not only do you have to get a flu shot. if you're showing flu systems we kick you out. you're going home, man, people try to tough it out and all it does it get more people sick and fox studios here, i swear every human being has a cold today. i am cold-free and flu-free, except i go i and go t. >> brenda: i don't know what you're talking about, guys, go home now, please. gary k, what do you think? >> amazingly, i'm going to tell you, ok, if i'm a company and i have 45 workers and 25 of them get the flu and they're out for a week, that's going to hurt my business. i think that corporations and small compani should have every right to take care, or try to take care of the health of their employees or else. i think it's very important, the bottom line, what counts. if you don't do something like that and everybody gets sick, that hurts everybody, and i

think some-- i have no problem with the thing done. >> last word, caroline? >> i would say that the most important thing you can do then, if you want to put those in things into place, is make your employees be vegetarian. i'm just wondering what-- >> oh. >> and want them thave days off of work, have them all be vegetarians or vegans. >> and double their salaries, double their salaries, too, keep them healthier. >> brenda: you know what? >> don't tell that to-- >> and everybody, and i am he going home. you can do predictions, toby, thanks to caroline for joining us. searching for the names to help pay for that payroll tax hike most of us got? well, search no further. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] a full life measured in seats

starts with the right ones early on. car crash are the number one killer of children 1 through 13. learn how to pvent deaths and injuries by using the right car seat for your child's age and size. mortgage. married. two great kids. he wants to protect his family with a $500,000 term life insurance policy. what do you think it'll costim? a hundred dollars a month? sixty? forty? actually none of t the above. john can get a $500,000 policy -from a highly rated insurer - for under $25 a month. his secret? selectquote. selectquote is impartial. they'll search the pick of insurers like these to give you a choice of your best prices. selectquote has great savings on term life for women, too. john's wife carrie, can get a $500,000 policy for under $16 a month. selectquote has helped make term life insurance

affordable for hundreds of thousands of people since 1985. how about you? just call this number or visit selectquote dot com. >> predictions, gary b, you're up. >> brenda, hallelujah, google has been declared free of any search bias by the government. i think the stock makes